Winter Leadership Conference | December 5-7 | Rancho Palos Verdes , CA Register Today View Schedule

§ 1329(c)

Marshall, In re

Ruling: 
Reconversion to chapter 13 was denied as the plan modification could not provide for payments over a period that expired after the applicable commitment period. (Bankr. D. Mass.)
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Marshall, In re. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Consumer case opionion summary, case decided on September 20,2018, LexisNexis #1118-058

Meserole, In re

Ruling: 
Debtor's proposed modification to 2013 plan denied as it would extend payment to themortgagee several years past the five-year limitation. (Bankr. W.D.N.Y.)
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Meserole, In re. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Consumer case opionion summary, case decided on January 24,2018, LexisNexis #0318-026

Meserole, In re

Ruling: 
Debtor's proposed modification to 2013 plan denied as it would extend payment to themortgagee several years past the five-year limitation. (Bankr. W.D.N.Y.)
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Meserole, In re. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Consumer case opionion summary, case decided on January 24,2018, LexisNexis #0318-026

In re Zellmer

This matter came before the court on the chapter 13 Trustee's motion to dismiss or convert for failure of debtor to make payments due as required by the confirmed plan in the case. Debtor countered with a motion to confirm a proposed modified plan, to which the trustee objected.
Ruling: 
Plan modification denied due to failure to provide required number of monthly payments.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Zellmer. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Consumer case opionion summary, case decided on February 23,2012, LexisNexis #0312-134

In re Miller

A debtor filed for relief under chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code and a plan was confirmed. The debtor filed an amended plan seeking to suspend payments for eight months from June 2008 through January 2009. A chapter 13 trustee objected to confirmation of the amended plan because the debtor was one month delinquent with payments under her confirmed plan.
Ruling: 
Amended plan calling for eight month suspension of payments denied absent evidence of debtor's ability to pay.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Miller. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Consumer case opionion summary, case decided on June 05,2008, LexisNexis #0708-069
Subscribe to § 1329(c)